Legislators Should Demand Sound Transit Audit

The previous post detailed why Seattle should protest $1.2 Lynnwood Link FTA grant.   That Sound Transit CEO Rogoff’s claims it would attract 68,500 daily riders demonstrated he’s either totally incompetent or blatantly mendacious.  That extending Central Link routed through the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT) severely limited capacity to where, at least during peak commute, any riders added by the extension will reduce access for future Northgate riders and current University Link riders.

The post also opined the Seattle Times Traffic Lab article had, if not cheered, abided Rogoff’s claim.  That it showed a similar lack of concern about Rogoff’s 2019 Budget even more absurd claim light rail ridership would increase to 162 million by 2041.  That Rogoff’s ST3, “the most ambitious transit system expansion plan in the country,” would do absolutely nothing to increase transit capacity into Seattle.  That any riders added by the “expansion” beyond Lynnwood to Everett or beyond Angel Lake to Federal Way and Tacoma will further reduce access for riders on current routes in Seattle.   

The budget also showed Sound Transit intended to continue their decade long refusal to increase bus transit capacity until at least 2041.  Yet the Seattle Times, who earlier advocated for increased bus transit, continues to ignore concerns.  Senators Murray and Cantwell have, as yet, declined to respond to emails urging they oppose FTA grant. 

However the legislatures transportation committee, whose members have previously ignored concerns should be more receptive.   What began as Sound Transit Board members asking legislators to enable voters approve $15 billion to “fully fund light rail” has morphed into Sound Transit 2019 budget plans to spend $96 billion between 2017 and 2041.   That Sound Transit’s 2019 budget projects the legislation enabling 15 years of car tab fees, property and sales taxes that was supposed to provide $15 billion is now expected to generate $64 billion between 2017 and 2041.  

Legislators should be particularly concerned both ST3 costs and tax revenue are “substantially” higher than the $54 billion and $33 billion voters were told prior to the 2016 vote.  Sound Transit may have been treated “favorably” because contractors “benefitted” Republicans and their unions “benefitted” Democrats.   However they have an obligation to assure their constituents will “benefit” from the taxes they’ve already paid and will continue to do so for as long as the Sound Transit Board decrees they’re needed.    

They could do that with an audit.  The Seattle Times for years has refused to make auditing Sound Transit a legislative priority.  Their lack of concern about Sound Transit 2017-to-2041 plans indicates they will continue to do so.  It's particularly "unfortunate" for Seattle residents whose 70% approval enabled ST3 and who will loose access as a result.  

The legislature In 2008 funded an Independent Review Team because of concerns about I-90 Bridge’s ability to withstand loads from light rail trains.   They can surely fund an outside audit forcing Sound Transit to justify the huge increase in costs and taxes from what they told residents prior to the ST3 vote.  

Even more important the audit could assess the ability of Sound Transit’s 2019 Budget long-range pan to effectively deal with the area’s congestion.  Sooner or later "everyone" will recognize Sound Transit's "probable" failure to do so  Until they're audited the 2019 budget proposal is just the first of years and billions wasted on Rogoff's "most ambitious  transit system plan in the country".  Like the Seattle Times Traffic Lab the legislature's transit committees need to be "persuaded".